The parliamentary process of re-consolidation of the majority around the government's program has left a legacy of uncertainty as to the cynical parliamentary accounting, but also opened the curtain to a discussion by the bitter and hard. I realize that without meditating on the substance has little meaning given to the form, but the intervention of Hon. Peter's eye allows us to observe posted two topics that are entangled with each other: respect for institutions and freedom of expression of a parliamentarian. Terms such as "rapist of democracy" and many other pyrotechnic periphrasis enriched or depleted, the speech of DP and the state of the art, it seems insignificant quibble if Berlusconi or the raping of democracy has seduced the tenderness. The point is another: can an elected official to use such a linguistic register in the exercise of its functions? Certainly, this issue goes beyond the guarantees of Art. 21 of the Constitution, however, the status of the parliamentarian was well defined by our constituents: the Constitution Article 67 Each Member of Parliament represents the Nation, then you too and I read that I write. And you would have used the same vocabulary? Yet the members of Parliament can not be held accountable for their opinions (Art. 68) and so they have maximum freedom in the exercise of their functions. E 'possible to think that DP, knowing also the live broadcast, has forced his speech to try to establish it as the Cricket Parliament and intercept the kind of voters? The Rules of the Chamber of Deputies defines the mesh of the freedom of Members: Article 59 paragraph 1, if a Member pronounces words or unseemly crowd with his support for freedom of discussion, the President shall call him. Fini has called and in fact did so twice (Reg. Chamber Article 60 paragraph 2) and even could remove him or bring the complaint to the Bureau to participate in parliamentary proceedings. I am not aware of any measures were taken in this direction. I wonder: the momentum of DP was a surplus of representation or an unseemly spectacle for our institutions? A speech by decanting and maybe take it back in other seasons or by health policy judgments without further appeal? Many questions, but one thing is certain. Berlusconi with the women we can do ...
Thomas
0 comments:
Post a Comment